GANDRETI PREMAVATHI Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR VIZIANAGARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal for setting aside order dated 25-1-2006 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby he dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant for issuance of a mandamus to the respondents to appoint her as fair price shop dealer of Modavalasa Village, Denkada Mandal, Vizianagaram District.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of present writ appeal are that by a notification in letter No.2550/2002 K, dated 4-10-2002, Revenue Divisional Officer, Vizianagaram (respondent No.3) invited applications from Open Category (Women) candidates for appointment as fair price shop dealer of Modavalasa Village, Denkada Mandal, Vizianagaram District. The appellant, respondent No.4 and Sri Gandreti Bangar Raju submitted their applications. The Mandal Revenue Officer forwarded their applications to respondent No.3. All of them appeared in the selection held on 25-10-2002. By his proceedings in Roc.No.2550/ 023, dated 7-11-2002, respondent No.2 disqualified the appellant and rejected her candidature mentioning that she failed X class; that her husband is presently Upa-Sarpanch; that her father-in-law SriAppanna was removed as fair price shop dealer in connection with a case under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act and that she was an 'Anganwadi' teacher as on the date of interview though she later resigned. The candidature of Sri G. Bangar Raju was rejected as the vacancy was reserved for woman category. As a consequence of this, the qnly candidate who remained in the field was respondent No.4 and she was appointed as fair price shop dealer.

(3.) The appellant challenged the appointment of respondent No.4 by filing an appeal before Joint Collector, Vizianagaram (respondent No.2) who dismissed the same vide his order in FPSAP No.25/02, G.8, dated 3-9-2003. The Joint Collector relied on the report of the Mandal Revenue Officer that the appellant's father-in-law Sri Gandreti Appanna had suffered punishment under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'), referred to G.O. Ms. No. 198 F.C.S. and C.A. (C.S.1V) Department, dated 5-2-1996, and held that the appellant was not entitled to be considered for appointment as fair price shop dealer. Revision filed by the appellant was dismissed by District Collector, Vizianagaram (respondent No.l) vide his order dated 22-11-2003.